After reading this entire thread, I'm not convinced that any of us are really too far away from being on similar pages. I'm really not detecting any extreme opinions that can't fall somewhere within the same camp. I do however get the impression that the length of this thread has been pushed mostly by those who'd rather argue the points made than try to come to a closer common ground in understanding them while getting hung up on terminology and trying to outsmart one another. Ego in this matter is not going to serve any of us too well if we stand the chance to reach a better understanding.

Those who teach this concept I don't find to be accurate and I completely disagree with.

 

I don't know what broad brush I don't like the concept and find a lot of writing behind it to be to simple and jumps to to many conclusions.

 

Good to know that you think that. But that's not how you said any of it originally. Semantics, perhaps.

After reading this entire thread, I'm not convinced that any of us are really too far away from being on similar pages. I'm really not detecting any extreme opinions that can't fall somewhere within the same camp. I do however get the impression that the length of this thread has been pushed mostly by those who'd rather argue the points made than try to come to a closer common ground in understanding them while getting hung up on terminology and trying to outsmart one another. Ego in this matter is not going to serve any of us too well if we stand the chance to reach a better understanding.

 

You are probably right. There is a problem and we need to talk about it and be open-minded about the causes and (I dare wish) solutions.

After reading this entire thread, I'm not convinced that any of us are really too far away from being on similar pages. I'm really not detecting any extreme opinions that can't fall somewhere within the same camp. I do however get the impression that the length of this thread has been pushed mostly by those who'd rather argue the points made than try to come to a closer common ground in understanding them while getting hung up on terminology and trying to outsmart one another. Ego in this matter is not going to serve any of us too well if we stand the chance to reach a better understanding.

 

I wish I could be that optimistic.

 

I cannot.

Is racism and prejudice the same thing ?? I am totally not racist against any color BUT, if you have garbage in your yard and don't pick it up, I don't care what color you are, I'm prejudice... I guess what I'm trying to say is I "judge" folks on how they carry about their daily lives not the color of their skin...

Is racism and prejudice the same thing ?? I am totally not racist against any color BUT, if you have garbage in your yard and don't pick it up, I don't care what color you are, I'm prejudice... I guess what I'm trying to say is I "judge" folks on how they carry about their daily lives not the color of their skin...

 

I do the same thing. For instance, if you have a confederate flag flying above your cannon in your front yard, I'm not going to think you're my "type of people", even if I've never laid eyes on you. (This is a true example of someone that lives nearby...not you commando.)

 

I was just lamenting the fact that a relative of mine piles their garbage on their front porch instead of taking it all the way out to the garbage can. I mean, I know they're poor, but do they HAVE to feed into the white-trash stereotype? Just sayin'....

So would the arthor consider her a racist? I certainly wouldn't, she may have views that differ but she certain doesn't judge black people due to their race.

 

Being racist isn't a permanent state. You can change. I would imagine that the author would agree that my wife was acting racist in moments when I pointed that out to her. I would also imagine that any objective person would agree, as they would agree when she called me on my racist moments.

 

If he says all white people are racists, then he would say she is a racist. My belief is that the mind frame can be changed. It won't change without recognition of the divide and the injustices that exist.

Being racist isn't a permanent state. You can change. I would imagine that the author would agree that my wife was acting racist in moments when I pointed that out to her. I would also imagine that any objective person would agree, as they would agree when she called me on my racist moments.

 

If he says all white people are racists, then he would say she is a racist. My belief is that the mind frame can be changed. It won't change without recognition of the divide and the injustices that exist.

 

One of my main problems with the article is the assumption all white people are racist and black people can not be racist.

 

He doesn't say anything about mindset changing. He's saying inherent since birth because of your skin color. He links causation with race which seems racist in and of itself.

One of my main problems with the article is the assumption all white people are racist and black people can not be racist.

 

He doesn't say anything about mindset changing. He's saying inherent since birth because of your skin color. He links causation with race which seems racist in and of itself.

 

What I believe is implied by the article is that lack of recognition of engrained racist structures is a part of the issue and that a lack of recognition makes you complicit to a racist system. Therefore, you are not racist solely because of skin color, rather you are racist for a lack of recognition of systemic racism. In order to change, we must not be afraid of the dialogue, or exploring the challenges and solutions that come from said dialogue.

Is racism and prejudice the same thing ?? I am totally not racist against any color BUT, if you have garbage in your yard and don't pick it up, I don't care what color you are, I'm prejudice... I guess what I'm trying to say is I "judge" folks on how they carry about their daily lives not the color of their skin...

 

I believe that a definition of racism is prejudice based on race, so they would be different. I can be prejudiced without being racist; I can't be racist without being prejudiced against one's race, however.

What I believe is implied by the article is that lack of recognition of engrained racist structures is a part of the issue and that a lack of recognition makes you complicit to a racist system. Therefore, you are not racist solely because of skin color, rather you are racist for a lack of recognition of systemic racism. In order to change, we must not be afraid of the dialogue, or exploring the challenges and solutions that come from said dialogue.

 

You are going down the either/or slope again. Either I recognize the system how you define it or I'm racist.

Things to ponder that might help this along:

 

• I've never met a soul who got pulled over for Driving While White.

 

• I've never met a white person subjected to redlining or refused housing in certain neighborhoods, as long as they had the ability to afford it.

 

• Black people can most certainly be racist. But black folks' racism doesn't have the same detrimental impact upon whites that white folks' racism does on blacks. The fact that boardrooms and upper management positions are overwhelmingly dominated by white people in companies all across the US means those are the people who hold all the power. If they want to act upon their racism, they don't have to be violent about it. They have a wealth of other means at their disposal.

I don't think that LB ever said that it doesn't exist, but just not as much as you're making it out to in the present day, or that it is the only or primary reason for racial problems. You constantly driving it like it is, and the assessment that he is part of the problem if he doesn't see it like you, is in itself part of the problem, and ridiculously shallow. You sound like a broken record stuck on one note incapable of blending a few to create a harmony.

 

He never said or implied any such thing. Go back and read the posts. He said privledge comes from wealth. I said only addressing socioeconomic issues is a lacking perspective.

 

My perspective, so that it is clear for you and others, is not that wealth doesn't create privledge. It is that racial privledge exists and must be addressed as a part of conquering any racial divide we hope to bridge in this country. It is a primary factor and, in not recognizing it as such, you are complicit in the issue.

You are going down the either/or slope again. Either I recognize the system how you define it or I'm racist.

 

You chose to ignore the examples given in the article and the fact that minorities believe in the existence of racial privledge. I can't help you.

 

Even if you don't believe in racial privledge, minorities do. This divide must be addressed before any true racial equality can be achieved- point blank!

You chose to ignore the examples given in the article and the fact that minorities believe in the existence of racial privledge. I can't help you.

 

Even if you don't believe in racial privledge, minorities do. This divide must be addressed before any true racial equality can be achieved- point blank!

 

The point is you keep stating that if I don't accept your premise that I'm either problem or racist. Again which is textbook false dichotomy by you.

 

You are telling me there are no other scenarios other than accept you and the author's outlook on society or you are the problem and inherently racist.

 

Like I said based on basic reasoning this makes zero sense. There are obviously other possible scenarios.